Well, I'm disappointed but not surprised. No one addressed the question at hand.

 

I'm not asking if its best for the country/best for the ticket/best for women.

 

I'm asking if a)we have evolved to a point where motherhood is no different than fatherhood (ie they're interchangeable) b)is it possible that this is not the best decision for the Palin family and c)if you were a female in her position would you do it?

 

Notice that I never advocated Dems using this against her. Notice that I'm not making a blanket statement about women. Notice that most of you didn't actually answer the question.

 

Any takers or do some of you just want to throw out crap and avoid the posed question?

Well, I'm disappointed but not surprised. No one addressed the question at hand.

 

I'm not asking if its best for the country/best for the ticket/best for women.

 

I'm asking if a)we have evolved to a point where motherhood is no different than fatherhood (ie they're interchangeable) b)is it possible that this is not the best decision for the Palin family and c)if you were a female in her position would you do it?

 

Notice that I never advocated Dems using this against her. Notice that I'm not making a blanket statement about women. Notice that most of you didn't actually answer the question.

 

Any takers or do some of you just want to throw out crap and avoid the posed question?

I'll take the question. I have half and step siblings but only one full sibling. It is very easy to see that I share more, talk more, and have a closer bond with my mother. This isn't saying that my father is a bad father or anything and we aren't very close (we are), but that bond is there with my mother. Now my full brother would be the exact opposite.

 

I see with my two half sisters that one is daddy's girl and one is mommy's girl, has always been that way. My half brother is too young to probably count in this discussion.

 

With my stepsisters there is a HUGE difference, one lives with her mother, the other lives with my step-father and my mother.

 

So my answer is that I do believe a greater bond is made with one parent, but I don't think that bond has to be the mother, I would say that is divided equally. Some of Palin's children probably have a greater bond with her husband and some do with her. I think it's pretty clear from watching the speech that her youngest girl bonds to her more. So yes, I think we have evolved to a point where motherhood is no different than fatherhood. I think this is an excellent decision for the Palin family, they will have experiences that very few children will be able to have and I feel they will still get equal love from there mother just like any child that has a parent whose job(s) requires them to be away a lot. While growing up, my mother worked A LOT of hours past a normal 40 hour work week (60-80 a lot of the time), she is very successful and we have a great bond. I can't answer as a woman, but as a child whose mother was very successful in her career, I am very proud of her and if she was in Palin's position even if I was an infant, I would say GO FOR IT!

 

I hope this is what you were looking for.

Well, I'm disappointed but not surprised. No one addressed the question at hand.

 

I'm not asking if its best for the country/best for the ticket/best for women.

 

I'm asking if a)we have evolved to a point where motherhood is no different than fatherhood (ie they're interchangeable) b)is it possible that this is not the best decision for the Palin family and c)if you were a female in her position would you do it?

 

Notice that I never advocated Dems using this against her. Notice that I'm not making a blanket statement about women. Notice that most of you didn't actually answer the question.

 

Any takers or do some of you just want to throw out crap and avoid the posed question?

 

a)we have evolved to a point where motherhood is no different than fatherhood (ie they're interchangeable) I honestly don't think that the OVERALL country has at this point. These days "feminists" are not just those seeking to work outside the home. There are 2 sorts of feminists these days: Those that still fight for equality with men in the workplace, politics, etc; and those that fight for the rights of women to be "traditional". Then...there are probably more women than either of the other two groups combined that are stuck in the middle, forced to work, but feeling guilty because they can't be home with their kids. These in the middle are in the lower class and middle class, I would say. I don't know too many upper class people of any gender, but the ones that I have met that are working mothers love their jobs. They are also in professions and at the level within, where they have the ability to arrange their schedule to accommodate their family priorities.

 

The big question to me is where the majority of men really fall on the scale. Most men I personally know would prefer their wives (or hypothetical wives) stay home with the children, and that the men be the major breadwinner in the family. I have some experience in the workplace being the lone "female" in the group of decision makers. I will tell you....the sexist attitudes and comments about the abilities of women are not as far advanced as one would anticipate....when the doors are closed and the expectation of "nothing leaves this room" is in place. I have often thought if I were the type, I could have a field day and be one rich woman with what I've heard/experienced.

 

b)is it possible that this is not the best decision for the Palin family and

 

I certainly think it's a possibility. It seems she's had a great handle on keeping her family priorities in place to date, though. My question is how many of the same changes she implemented can be brought to Washington with her. I read she fired the personal chef at the Gov house in Alaska. Can she do that in Washington? She drives herself to work in AK. Can she do that in DC? I don't think that's likely at all, along with her kids being escorted/guarded all the time. I would assume Mr. Palin would have a tail all the time as well. I'm not sure that she'll be able to have the same level of control either over keeping her history of cutting out the unnecessary stuff, or in setting her family priorities. I mean, it's going to be really hard to be just a 'hockey' mom in DC. Not saying she can't or shouldn't do it, but it won't be as simple as it was in Alaska.

 

As to her kids...just as I don't think Bristol's issues should be any of our business, I don't think the fact that the baby has DS and she chose to have him makes her a saint. I think that with the right staff, she'll be able to take care of him famously. I think Bristol's problems will work themselves out, because she'll be 18 soon and married, so even though Mrs. Palin is her mother and supports her, she's an adult in an adult's world at that point.

 

c)if you were a female in her position would you do it?

 

Honestly, no. I've had too many times in my life when I had to miss things in my kids lives that were important to me and to them because of work. There are times I couldn't devote nearly the amount of time to them that I would have liked. I have so many wishes, but no regrets. I had no choice. But, I did turn down some lucrative promotions over the years to stay in Louisville with my kids and to ensure that I would have as much time as I possibly could with them. If I were in her position, I would have said no.

He could always just take tons of vacation time, like Bush.

 

Presidents NEVER vacation. Thanks for your input.

Mothers with young children better serve the children and their husbands, in an ideal world, at home with their children, raising them up to be young men and women of honor and virtue. Apply label to me as suits you.

 

This is not an ideal world.

 

If we as a society have reached the point where the differences (including benefits and responsibilities) of motherhood and fatherhood are no more than job descriptions and checklists, then we have de-volved rather than e-volved.

 

If I was a female in her position, I would have not assumed the governorship of Alaska with the age of children she has.

Mothers with young children better serve the children and their husbands, in an ideal world, at home with their children, raising them up to be young men and women of honor and virtue. Apply label to me as suits you.

This is not an ideal world.

 

If we as a society have reached the point where the differences (including benefits and responsibilities) of motherhood and fatherhood are no more than job descriptions and checklists, then we have de-volved rather than e-volved.

 

If I was a female in her position, I would have not assumed the governorship of Alaska with the age of children she has.

 

Why can fathers not do the same thing?

 

Realizing full well that ideally both Mom and Dad are home rearing their children but also realizing that there is something special about a mother is it not fair to ask if the children of Sarah Palin are going to be worse off with their mother as VP than they are today?

 

I think there care at the National Observatory will be fine. First Dude will be there and mom will be there...maybe not as much as the traditional mom, but I think they will be fine.

If I was a female in her position, I would have not assumed the governorship of Alaska with the age of children she has.

And that's why you're just the kind of traditional gal I love so much... :lol: